A04474:840
A reply unto M. Hardinges answerA replie vnto M. Hardinges ansvveare
A reply unto M. Hardinges answer by perusing whereof the discrete, and diligent reader may easily see, the weak, and unstable grounds of the Romaine religion, which of late hath been accounted Catholic. By John Jewel Bishop of Salisbury.A replie vnto M. Hardinges ansvveare by perusinge whereof the discrete, and diligent reader may easily see, the weake, and vnstable groundes of the Romaine religion, whiche of late hath beene accompted Catholique. By Iohn Iewel Bishoppe of Sarisburie.
Imprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the sign of the Black Oliphant, by Henry Wykes, Anno. 1565Imprinted at London : In Fleetestreate, at the signe of the Blacke Oliphante, by Henry VVykes, Anno. 1565
Article 2 › The B. of Salisbury.Article 2 › The B. of Sarisburie.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
As for Nestorius, it is known, he was a wicked, and a blasphemous Heretic, and was worthily condemned by sundry holy Fathers and Councils. Philastrius, Epiphanius, and S. Augustine, have written namely of his errors:
As for Nestorius, it is knowen, he was a wicked, and a blasphemous Heretique, and was woorthely condemned by sundrie holy Fathers and Councelles. Philastrius, Epiphanius, and S. Augustine, haue written namely of his errours:
The Council of Ephesus, the Council of Chalcedon, Coelestinus, Gelasius, Leo, Bishops of Rome, Cyrillus Bishop of Alexandria, have ripped up, and condemned all the branches of his Heresies. Yet none of them all ever charged Nestorius with this new Heresy of M. Hardinges making. If there had been in it any show of trueth, M. Harding, as he is eloquent, would have laid out all the Circumstances, When this strange error first began, Where, and Howe long it continued, Who wrote against it, and by Whom, and in What Council it was condemned. Verily this great silence declareth some want. It must needs be a very strange Heresy, that never had neither beginning, nor ending: nor defender, nor reprover: nor mouth to utter it: nor ear to hear it: nor pen to write it: nor time to last in: nor place to rest in. And if all this had been true of Nestorius, ⟨p. 113⟩yet had it been no reason, that for any one mans private error, Christs Institution should be broken.
The Councel of Ephesus, the Councel of Chalcedon, Coelestinus, Gelasius, Leo, Bishops of Rome, Cyrillus Bishop of Alexandria, haue ripte vp, and condemned al the braunches of his Heresies. Yet none of them al euer charged Nestorius with this newe Heresie of M. Hardinges makinge. If there had béene in it any shewe of truethe, M. Hardinge, as he is eloquente, woulde haue layed out al the Circumstances, When this strange errour first beganne, Where, and Howe longe it continued, Who wrote againste it, and by Whom, and in What Councel it was condemned. Uerely this great silence declareth some wante. It must néedes be a very strange Heresie, that neuer had neither beginninge, nor endinge: nor defender, nor reprouer: nor mouthe to vtter it: nor eare to heare it: nor penne to write it: nor time to last in: nor place to reast in. And if al this had béene true of Nestorius,